COMPLAINT FILED ON: 18.11.2010
DISPOSED ON:12.07.2011
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)
12th DAY OF JULY -2011
PRESENT:- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT
SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER
SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER
COMPLAINT No.2599/2010
Complainant OPPOSITE PARTY | Smt.Talluri Padma Priya W/o Mr.Talluri Tushar Kanti Prasad, Aged about 44 years, Residing at Plot No.102, “Harika Villa”, 1st Line, Shanti Nagar, Opp:Sai Aditya School, Ring Road, Koriteepadu (Post), Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. Advocate: Sri.Prasad & Co., V/s. M/s Presidency Elite, Office at No.895/1, “Skanda” 14th Cross, Mahalakshmi La Opposite Party, Bangalore-560 086. Rep by the Partner Mr.V.Bhaskar Reddy. And also M/sPresidency Elite, Rep by the Partner Mr.V.Bhaskar Reddy, Plot No.717, 2nd Floor, Poornashashi Complex, Modi Hospital Road, 2nd Stage West of Card Road, Basweswara Nagar, Bangalore-560 089. Placed Ex-parte. |
O R D E R S
SRI. B.S. REDDY, PRESIDENT
The complainant filed this complaint U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986, seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P.) to execute the sale deed by receiving the balance consideration or in the alternative to refund the amount of Rs.3,25,000/- along with compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest at 24 % p.a. on the allegation of deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
In spite of service of notice, by paper publication OP failed to appear hence placed ex-parte.
2. To substantiate the complaint averments the complainant filed affidavit evidence.
3. Arguments on complainant’s side heard.
4. We have gone through the complainant averments, the affidavit evidence of the complainant and the documents produced. On the basis of these materials it is crystal clear that OP agreed to form sites in the layout called “M/s Presidency Elite” situated at Doddamarahalli, Yelluvahally, Varamallenahalli, Nandi Hobli, Chickaballapura Taluk, Kolar District and to allot a site measuring 30 X 50 feet for a total consideration of Rs.8,62,500/- and received advance amount of Rs.3,25,000/- on 18.03.500/-, executed agreement deed acknowledging the receipt of the advance amount. The terms of the agreement deed reveals that the complainant was required to pay the balance sale consideration within a month of approval of the layout. Op has also issued the receipt for having received the advance sale consideration. OP has not formed any layout and no land has been acquired for the formation of the layout. The complainant demanded for refund of the amount and he has also shown his willingness and readiness to pay the balance consideration and get the sale deed executed. Op failed to refund the amount. The legal notice issued was returned with a postal shara ‘Left’ and the notice was also sent by UCP, the same has been duly served. OP has not replied for the said notice and has not complied the demand to refund the amount. In the absence of any material regarding formation of layout, OP cannot be directed to execute the sale deed in respect of the site in favour of the complainant. The act of OP in not forming the layout and allotting the site or in not refunding the advance received amounts to deficiency in service on its part. The complainant is entitled for the alternative relief for refund of the amount with interest at 18% p.a. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R
The complainant filed by the complaint is allowed in part.
The OP is directed to refund an amount of Rs.3,25,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from 18.03.2008 till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-to the complainant.
This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of this order.
Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 12th day of July 2011.)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Cs:
